Australia Imposes Internet Filter

tw33k said:

The Rudd government's internet censorship proposal is not about protecting the children. It's about politics.

tw33k said:

Politics, not child protection.

tw33k said:

Sorry, you are wrong. The minister heading this outrageous scheme, Stephen Conroy has, time and again, stated that the Government's aim is to "protect minors" from "harmful" content. This has nothing to do with software piracy at all. You are talking about a totally different issue

You sort of contradicted yourself there a bit. But what I mentioning here was that it's not just one area that lawmakers in general are looking at. And once they start filtering one bad thing it won't take long before the rest is added in as well.

Where's my contradiction??? I stated that the Govts plan is about politics not child protection then I quoted the minister who is pretending it's about "protecting minors". I don't see where I have contradicted myself at all.

tw33k said:

Where's my contradiction??? I stated that the Govts plan is about politics not child protection then I quoted the minister who is pretending it's about "protecting minors". I don't see where I have contradicted myself at all.

I don't think you did either Tw33k...

I don't blame you for being mad...give 'em hell!

Seriously...this is really bad. We need to let the Government know we won't stand for it. Vote them out!!

@zidane...yeah man, I am mad! This is very serious

tw33k said:

Where's my contradiction??? I stated that the Govts plan is about politics not child protection then I quoted the minister who is pretending it's about "protecting minors". I don't see where I have contradicted myself at all.

The contradiction wasn't anything intentional on your part but the situation itself. Yet you have to know that "any" politician wants to "shine in the bright light" so to speak being what that is "politics"!

Presently it's one thing now and later something else will be brought up later. You can see that in the other article there. Another thing is that politicians will always lean towards their constituents(backers and the like) to a greater degree over just anyone who disagrees. Unfortunately that's reality too often.

Night Hawk said:

And once they start filtering one bad thing it won't take long before the rest is added in as well.

That's part of the deeper ramifications to a 'filter' like this. Once a process like this begins, it cannot be stopped and who knows to what extent it will be 'abused'.

tw33k said:

Politics, not child protection.

Exactly.

The needs of the many are screwed to promote the needs of the few.

Of the 1175 URLs on their blacklist on September 30, 54% were Refused Classification material, and only 33% of those related to child sexual abuse. The rest of the blacklist? 41% was X18+ material, and 5% was R18+ material without a “restricted access system” to prevent access by minors.

It makes me wonder if their "National Broadband Network" is part of the plan to enable them to police the IP filtering even closer....
Or have I been watching too much Zeitgeist?